Team,

Regarding these two items,

?       STD CTG plans to develop v1.0 test spec in Oct. ?15.
 [Mark] May I ask why this will happen so late?

?       IoTivity QA  cannot run conformance test on IoTivity v1.0.0, but is 
only to check feature list (TBD)
 [Mark] I think each member company?s QA should run complete test against the 
v1.0.0 spec. and consider it as a private conformance test prior to the public 
conformance test. I am afraid that the test period will be long because of the 
gaps.


Thanks,
Mark Tung
Intel OIC test lead


From: ??? [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Thursday, January 22, 2015 3:21 AM
To: Macieira, Thiago; iotivity-dev at lists.iotivity.org; ???
Cc: ???; Bowden, George; Moses, Jaideep; Agerstam, Mats G; ???; ???; ???; 
Subramaniam, Ravi; ???; Mirani, Jawid; Tung, Mark Y; ??; ???
Subject: Re: Re: [dev] IoTivity v1.0.0 criteria proposal

Hi Thiago,

Please refer to my comments below.

Regards
June


June Yong Young

Principal Engineer
Web & Convergence Team, Software R&D Center
Samsung Electronics Co.,Ltd.

T: +82-31-301-6107, M: +82-10-9530-6107
E-mail :juney at samsung.com

------- Original Message -------
Sender : Thiago Macieira<thiago.macieira at intel.com<mailto:thiago.macieira at 
intel.com>>
Date : 2015-01-16 05:12 (GMT+09:00)
Title : Re: [dev] IoTivity v1.0.0 criteria proposal

[cutting the rest of the email because my client destroys HTML formatting when
replying]

Hi June

The email that Soonhwang forwarded to the dev mailing list appears to contain
a feature list. Has that feature list been documented in the IoTivity JIRA? If
not, can I ask that we begin doing that, especially for work that is not
complete?
-> [June] If you mean that we should put the feature list to be completed for 
IoTivity 1.0 and see the progress of the implementation,
          then that looks a good idea. I'll do that after ISG meeting to 
confirm IoTivity 1.0 criteria.
          But, I think I haven't received yet the confirmation regarding the 
feature list to be added on 1.0 from each member company.(Intel, MediaTek)
          BTW, I'm not able to find the feature list in SoonHwang's email that 
you mentioned. Could you forward it to me, so that I can confirm what you said?

We should also create a task entry for "IoTivity 1.0 release criteria" and
link that with any tasks that need to be completed before the release. That
way, everyone can know what the current status is of the release.
-> [June] Good idea, I'll think over about how to do that.

One thing I'm missing from the list in the email is OIC spec compliance. From
the discussions we began last year, it seemed that this would be a 1.0 must-
have requirement. Was this simply implied and thus not discussed?
Or is there now a proposal to release 1.0 before the spec is done? If this is
the case, then how do we plan on handling any spec differences that impact
compatibility? George wrote "v1.1.x ? v1.9.x should all be backward compatible
with v1.0.0" and I agree: compatibility breaks should happen either before the
1.0 release, or when the major number changes.
-> [June] The last email that I sent includes my opinion for the conformance 
test stuff below.
          This issue will be discussed in ISG meeting.
?       Spec v1.0 is expected to be finalized in end of Feb. not including IPR 
review completed
?       V1.0 Test spec plan has to be scheduled
?       STD CTG plans to develop v1.0 test spec in Oct. ?15.
?       IoTivity QA  cannot run conformance test on IoTivity v1.0.0, but is 
only to check feature list (TBD)

--
Thiago Macieira - thiago.macieira (AT) intel.com
  Software Architect - Intel Open Source Technology Center

[http://ext.samsung.net/mailcheck/SeenTimeChecker?do=b65f9d91e1020aef463d72ca1d75055855677e365f79214ef01bbc0a84f70a3b2895c88f2fde9a3856239170f5eb4b5c326bbdfb2ea96a2fcf878f9a26ce15a0]

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: ATT29328 1.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 24076 bytes
Desc: ATT29328 1.jpg
URL: 
<http://lists.iotivity.org/pipermail/iotivity-dev/attachments/20150122/e738517d/attachment.jpg>

Reply via email to